Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics What happened to Leupold?

There are paid shills that bash certain brands on forums. Not saying this is happening here, just take everything with a grain or two of salt.

Leupold has many lines, like all makers. Any discussion of optics without specifying which line in particular to which line of another maker is absolutely meaningless.

But generally, Leupold still very good (so far), even their VX-Freedom. Nightforce is much much better on average, but no better than high-end-line Leupolds that run about the same price.

It's funny but true. And they do fail, I've had a couple fail. Most didn't fail, but there you have it.

Some thought Stick was one for Alpha Brass...Peterson thread comes to mind...Those posts were hilarious reads. 😎

If they work, they work.

One of the unsung features of a Nightforce is its ability to be used as a billy club if needed. They managed to manufacture a lot of heft into those suckers!

The old Leupold “Knock”...

It’s been frustrating at times. I, too, have sent a few down the road after getting them repaired. Replacements were NF, Swfa and Bushnell for those Leupold’s that showed problems.

For me, VX6 glass is really nice to use for covering heads at distance...

My hope is Leupold will one day realize, if they would just copy the same internals as SWFA, add a zero stop, and lense the damn scope with Vx3 or Vx6 glass and sell them between $650-$1600 bucks, they’d hit a home run.

Just hoping....😎

I take mine salmon fishing for said use...😬😎

Don't think Alpha needs Stick. Maybe Peterson could use him.

Me too - have a few Leupolds also, like them too.

Mine have held zero but had a couple issues with tracking. I the the CDS option on the cheaper lines is just asking for trouble

x2 classic campfire there, “random number generaors”...love it 😁

I've had numerous Leupolds and they have worked without issue, the CDS-equipped ones working just fine on targets out to 500 yards. But....I kept hearing about Leupold's failings and how robust and dependable Nightforce is.

So I bought one, an SHV. Love it.

Then an NXS 2.5-10X42.

When it arrived, I unboxed it (sorry, no 5-minute youtube video), and was looking through it when I noticed a black speck that I eventually determined to be on the inside of the objective lense.

I had also recently received a copy of JB's excellent Gun Gack II. Holding the NXS by the ocular, I whacked Mr. Barsness's book somewhat forcefully with my brand-spanking-new Nightforce.

The speck is gone and the Nightforce has went on to participate in some deer and coyote killings.

I would have had to think about whacking my VX-5HD like that.....

Several things happened. The biggest one being the internet and all the buzz about long range hunting and shooting and TV shows promoting it. All this allows the rapid spread of information, especially on "optics forums" and the uninformed may have their opinions swayed by that information, whether it is good or bad.

Take me for example. I have been using Leupold scopes in Alaska since the early 70's because they had great eye relief and were light in weight. They were always used as "set and forget" scopes. I zeroed my scopes for 200 yards since the majority of Alaskan game is shot under 200 yards, then I verified their point of impact with my loads out to 400 yards and learned to use "hold over" with the scopes reticle. Had good success with that system and the only time I ever touched the scopes turrets was if I needed to re-zero a scope for what ever reason.

I still believe that system works for most big game shooting in Alaska, as many of my friends prove every year. But, in much of North America the turret twisting craze is wide spread, hunters/shooters want that capability and many of them are of the opinion Leupold's don't hold up to constant turret twisting and I have no reason to doubt them. I think it comes down to ones shooting needs and wants.

I now have a couple of rifle/scope combos that have scopes known for reliable turret twisting and both utilize the mil system. But, this fall I will grab the .338 with a Leupold VX-R 3-9x40 with Firedot #4 reticle and a Kenton Industries elevation turret and go hunting. I doubt I will have cause to twist a turret and if I miss a critter it will not be the scopes fault. I am also looking at the Nightforce SHV 3-10 which would add another 6 ounces to my rifles weight.

Bottom line for me is if I wanted to be a constant turret twister I would look past Leupold.

AT least they have eye relief!

Couldn't agree more. My grandpa killed lots of game at all kinds of distances. I doubt ever at any of our "modern-day" distances but he always would say " beware of the man who only shoots one rifle, they know how their trajectory like the back of their hands. ". I have a few different rifles that are set up with turret style scopes but it always seems that the one I shoot most is my mark v with vx3. No dial needed. Just range time.

I can take it with a grain of salt about Leopold mechanics. I've never had an issue but I'm also not constantly using the dials. My opinion is neutral like Switzerland.

I have a SHV on my Creed. The VX-6 has better glass than the NF but I trust the NF more.

Both have good ER, the Leupold eyebox and ER are hard to beat.

I’ve sent a few Leupolds back for failure to hold zero, but still like them.

Just a matter of trust.

DF

You are not wrong.

I’m shooting 270 with vx2 and cds reliably from 200 to 650 yards ...hope internet scope wizards approve.

Well......I really worry about that .270.....(grin)